HONEYPATH CONSTRUCTION Vs. KISHORE DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is at the instance of the plaintiffs and is directed against the order no.99 dated August 26, 2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Second Court, Barasat, District North 24 Parganas in Title Suit No.3 of 1999 thereby rejecting an application under Order 18 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the plaintiffs.

(2.) THE short fact is that the plaintiffs/petitioners herein instituted a Title Suit No.3 of 1999 for specific performance of contract, permanent injunction and other reliefs against the defendants/opposite parties herein in respect of the property as described in the schedule of the plaint. THE suit was at the stage of recording evidence and in that suit, the plaintiff no.1 deposed on behalf of all the plaintiff. Subsequently, the plaintiff no.3 tendered evidence under Order 18 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure for marking a copy of a document dated December 13, 1997 as exhibit as secondary evidence. THE prayer for adducing evidence by the plaintiff no.3 has been rejected by the impugned order. At the same time, the learned Trial Judge has also closed the evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs. Being aggrieved, this application has been preferred.

(3.) THIS being the position, when the original is lying with the opposite party side as per claim of the petitioners, the carbon copy of the same may well be tendered as evidence under the provisions of Section 65(a) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.